BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Israeli terrorism in Lebanon

 
  

Page: 1 ... 56789(10)11

 
 
Dragon
17:06 / 09.08.06
Let me present a scenario. Hezbollah gives up the two Israeli soldier prisoners and stops shelling Israel. I would suggest that Hezbollah wouldn't do that because they want the fight. But, if they did, Israel would stop their attacks. Comments?

BTW, one possible reason Israelis are suffering fewer casualties could be because they are using shelters.
 
 
Pingle!Pop
18:20 / 09.08.06
Correctly, we might describe it as a series of exchanges of fire in which Israeli and Hizbollah forces intermittently engage each other and largely fire past each other at the civilian populations of Israel and thhe Lebanon.

But, as per the current BBC stock story (they seem to retain most of the story and change the occasional sentence every day), that's not actually what's happening:

More than 1,000 people, most of them civilians, have now been killed in the conflict, the Lebanese government has said. More than 100 Israelis, most of them soldiers, have also been killed.

Which, given that I'm sure civilians would be easier to kill than heavily armoured and highly trained IDF personnel, I think makes it clear that Hizbollah are at least primarily focusing on military targets. Israel may or may not be trying to kill the t'rrrrists, but given that they're not that easy to single out from civilians with very large, expensive bombs, it probably makes quite little difference.

Anyway, my main reason for being in this thread is this disgustingly under-reported bit of news:

The Israeli bombing of a Lebanese power plant has triggered the Mediterranean's worst ever environmental catastrophe, with up to 30,000 tons of heavy fuel oil spewing out into the sea and the sludge-covered bodies of dead fish littering the once pristine beaches.

... Which makes me feel horrible. I don't think there's much to discuss regarding the morality of the plant's bombing, but what I would like to know is whether there's anything that can be done to help? Israel is being less than helpful, to say the least:

The Israel navy also prohibited Lebanese and foreign officials from surveying the damage of the spill from Lebanon's territorial waters, the minister said.
 
 
elene
18:38 / 09.08.06
if they did, Israel would stop their attacks.

No, Dragon, Israel would not stop. Mr Bush and Mr Olmert have both said that Hezbollah must be disarmed in accordance with Security Council Resolution 1559.

one possible reason Israelis are suffering fewer casualties could be because they are using shelters.

Hezbollah is using mainly BM-14 and BM-21 Katyushas with payloads of about 8kg and 18kg respectively, they've fired about 3500 of them so far. Israel is dropping 500-pound Mark-82, 1,000-pound Mark-83 and 2,000-pound Mark-84 bombs, among others, and has flown about 2000 sorties (it's usually two bombs per run). Even leaving aside all IDF artillery barrages there's no comparison at all, Dragon, and it's not merely a matter of shelters.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
19:18 / 09.08.06
Which, given that I'm sure civilians would be easier to kill than heavily armoured and highly trained IDF personnel, I think makes it clear that Hizbollah are at least primarily focusing on military targets.

Well, and that they can't aim for shit - which they can't, of course - the rockets they are firing are unguided. So, they are more likely to be able to hit human targets who are nearby (id est, Israeli soldiers) or cause casualties by more direct means - guns, rockets, mortars - which are more easily directed at nearby targets.

However, you make a perfectly good point. Whereas both Israeli and Lebanese civilians might currently be living in fear of their lives, Lebanese civilians are on average a lot more likely to have that fear realised by being killed.

Interesting article on the latest from the horse's mouth, here.
 
 
Dead Megatron
19:20 / 09.08.06
But, do Israeli citizens usually have shelters???
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
19:55 / 09.08.06
Private civilian shelters I don't know about, DM, but the short answer is yes - there are bomb shelters in public buildings and cities within range of Hizbollah weaponry, and quite a lot of Israelis are apparently spending varying amounts of time in them. This ABC piece puts the number of Israelis living in shelters at half a million, which seems a bit startling. I've heard 200,000 elsewhere, but that may have been before the longer-range rockets were fired. The short answer is yes, Israel built a number of shelters, a luxury which southern Lebanon has generally not had the leisure to match.
 
 
elene
19:57 / 09.08.06
Israel occupied a part of Lebanon continuously from 1982 until 2000, Dead Megatron. During that time northern Israel was subject to frequent bombardment with rockets, so it’s not really that surprising that shelters exist. Most of them are just cellars or safe rooms, and wouldn’t protect against the sort of weapons Israel’s using in Lebanon.
 
 
Dead Megatron
20:10 / 09.08.06
What a way to live...

(sorry for the pointless post, but I needed to conclude my line of thougth here...)
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
20:18 / 09.08.06
Well, living in a shelter isn't a great life, certainly. On t'other hand, if your local is being hit by exploding things, it is probably better than living not in a shelter, if you see what I mean. I quite agree, though - it's all a bit fucked up, certainly?
 
 
Dead Megatron
20:26 / 09.08.06
Strong truth
 
 
sleazenation
20:34 / 09.08.06
Or to put it another way, living in a shelter might not be very nice, but at least it is, you know, living.
 
 
Ender
22:34 / 09.08.06
Listen, Hezbolah does not see themselves as terrorists. We need to stop and take into acount that these groups are small, and cant fight wars in the conventional sense (obviosly current "war" case in point).

Hezbolah, and other groups like them, see larger world power countries raping and pilliaging 3rd world nations of thier natural resources and going to great lengths to see that the countries in power stay in power.

Anyway, I dont know,.. I just feel the pinch of the GOP propiganda rag, and it just gets me so upset to hear the prime minister of Iraq refer to Iraqi patriots that feel that they are defending their country from invaders as terrorists.

We have a different way of life and it is difficult for us to imagine that there may be groups without political agenda that oppose us. More difficult is for us to understand how anyone liked living under the rule of Sadam Huesan, but let me say this: If China invaded your country tommorow, killed your president/prime minister would you roll over and watch as your way of life was striped away and a new "government aproved" life style was thrown up in its place? I wouldnt. I would go underground, I would get orginized and I would fight.

I understand that some would argue that it is not the same thing. That these Iraqi countrymen who are killing our soldiers are terrorists. I say they are patriots of a losing team.
 
 
Dragon
00:56 / 10.08.06
I think we are forgetting something. It's not just poor little Lebanon, it is also Syria and Iran. Iran is also in Iraq, causing as much mischief as possible. With Iran out of the picture, I think everybody would be better off. I hasten to add that I'm not suggesting we attack Iran. But, I think we should look for ways to decrease Iran's influence.
 
 
Dragon
01:42 / 10.08.06
Iran seems to think Hezbollah is the superior force.
 
 
Triumvir
01:50 / 10.08.06
addressing the ender/dragon point, the current conflict is essentially a proxy war being waged between Iran and Israel -- the situation is secondary. Hezbolah is essentially a miniturized version of Iran's Republican Guard. They have extensive training and armiment, as well as stratgic and organizational know-how courtsey of Iran. imo, dealing with the Hesbolah/Iran connection is essential to crafting a peace settlement.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
05:38 / 10.08.06
But, I think we should look for ways to decrease Iran's influence.

We have some, Dragon, but I don't think you'd like them.

Must be remarkable to post to Barbelith while having the entire membership on "ignore"...

I'm not entirely sure why you're so keen on Israel here, actually. You do realise that the entire leadership is made up of immigrants, right? And that lots of the inhabitants are orginally from Russia? Remember:

When a person in a country where corruption is prominant, where a wink and a nod is a way of life, it is this way of life that can affect the way that person perceives things in another country, and as a result, how he chooses to behave.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
07:54 / 10.08.06
Triumvir: I'm not sure we should limit this to Iran - the influence of Syria on Hezbollah is also significant, although to describe either as a political element of which Hezbollah is a part is posssibly to try to reframe the debate in terms of nation-states with which some form of negotiation can occur. Both Iran and Syria have some degree of control, but Hezbollah also relies on funding from individuals and groups outwith the Shi'ite crescent - and, according to Mohammed Raad, through very good investments, although that should possibly be taken with a pinch of salt. Dude. The HezbollISA. It's a good idea whose time has come.

But certainly you can't talk about Hezbollah without talking about Iran. On t'other hand, Hezbollah rely on the popular support of the Lebanese, not the Iranian people. Sooo... how about this.

Ceasefire. Exchange of prisoners. UN peacekeeping force. Israel withdraws from Shebaa farms. US permits US foreign aid to Israel to be funnelled into rebuilding Lebanese civilian infrastructure. Lebanese government places pressure, backed by UN forces on the ground, on Hezbollah to disarm. Without Israeli forces in the Shebaa Farms area, Hezbollah struggles to maintain justification for armed struggle. Ultimately becomes pro-Iranian Shi'ite political party with power base in southern Lebanon. Lebanese government able to extend its own authority into the south, forming closer alliances with and encouraging Hizbollah's social and educational programmes and increasingly partnering with them. Success of land-for-peace exchange in helping to get Iran's tanks off Israel's lawn causes Israeli eyes to look towards Golan Heights.

Unfortunately, the poor showing of the IDF in Lebanon means that Israeli insecurity will be up and the likelihood of land exchanges down, but as a principle it's still, I think, workable.
 
 
illmatic
08:02 / 10.08.06
one possible reason Israelis are suffering fewer casualties could be because they are using shelters

***boggles***

Nothing to do with the vastly superior firepower of the IDF then? The absence of the Hizbollah air force? Incidentally, Dragon, as a thought experiment, try and imagine,how it would be "read" if another country made air strikes against Israel.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
08:26 / 10.08.06
In Dragon's defence, he's quite right that having shelters is very handy when explodey things are being fired at you. However:

a) Israel is firing more explodey things, with at least theoretically far greater accuracy, at the Lebanon than Hezbollah is currently firing at Israel.

b) If you'll forgive me the speculation, I would suggest that in Dragon's imagining the civilian population of Lebanon is wilfully refusing to take simple steps to avoid being killed because, as we have established, some cultures don't really put a value on their own lives or those of others, and so your average Lebanese civilian would much rather

a) cause Israel some mild embarrassment on the international stage by contributing to the casualty figures than

b) live.
 
 
Ticker
12:51 / 10.08.06
I received this link in an email today:

Cease Fire Campaign

which is a project of Res Publica

Anyone heard of these folks before?
 
 
sleazenation
22:07 / 10.08.06
I think we are forgetting something. It's not just poor little Lebanon, it is also Syria and Iran. Iran is also in Iraq, causing as much mischief as possible. With Iran out of the picture, I think everybody would be better off. I hasten to add that I'm not suggesting we attack Iran. But, I think we should look for ways to decrease Iran's influence.

Dragon - I'm still keen to discover if you are aware of the political and docrinal differences between Shia Muslims and Sunni Muslims, what exactly you see as a 'weird' form of Islam and to what extent you think that the leader of one political/terrorist organizations is able to speak about the universal value of muslim life for all muslims everywhere...

beyond that... The conflict in the Middle East may be wider than than the disputed borders of Israel, but that does that make the large-scale killing and forced population movement in Lebanon any more acceptable?

As for 'decreasing Iran's influence', are you at all aware that the biggest single factor in increasing Iran's influence in recent years has been the US. The US neutralised the threats posed to Iran by Saddam's Iraq and Taliban Afghanistan. In the case of Iraq, The US managed to further to empower Iran by increasing the influence of Iraqi Shias, many of whose clerics were apparently educated in religious institutions in Iran. Even the raised oil prices that have resulted from instability in Iraq have managed to boost the prospects of Irans own indigenous oil supplies
 
 
Dragon
01:49 / 11.08.06
It is really interesting to see how different other cultures are from most people in America. When I say something here in Berbelith that I would say elsewhere, it is not understood here, whereas it is understood immediately by someone within my own country.

Not al muslims are created equal. There are many varieties. The 'weird' varieties are what I would call extremists. Maybe this article will be helpful to your enlightenment of what I mean. I think radical or extremist Islam is a disortion of what it should be.
 
 
Francine I
02:15 / 11.08.06
"It is really interesting to see how different other cultures are from most people in America. When I say something here in Berbelith that I would say elsewhere, it is not understood here, whereas it is understood immediately by someone within my own country."

That's because Americans are routinely exposed to an intense propaganda program and are indoctrinated from an early age to regard with suspicion the opinions and approaches of other cultures. Not all Americans are created equal, of course, but sadly the propaganda is typically quite effective.

You might be surprised how many members of Barbelith are Americans or American ex-patriots. I suspect you assume those who do not share your perspective must not be Americans. I would encourage you to broaden your perspective.

Also, your views may be analyzed quite aggressively because you fail to address challenges to your points. Earlier in this thread, in fact, you claimed that you would return with evidence to support your apparently xenophobic ontology. So far, you've continued to offer vaguely caustic opinions but have not followed through on your promise. You might consider that this could be perceived as an implicit concession of your point.
 
 
Char Aina
07:14 / 11.08.06
Not al muslims are created equal. There are many varieties.

you have shown me a link with the title 'militant islam' in the address.
can you explain it in your own words?
do you have an opinion of militant democracy?


When I say something here in Berbelith that I would say elsewhere, it is not understood here, whereas it is understood immediately by someone within my own country.


perhaps you could explain what it is barbelith is missing?

lets take this, for example:
Let me present a scenario. Hezbollah gives up the two Israeli soldier prisoners and stops shelling Israel. I would suggest that Hezbollah wouldn't do that because they want the fight. But, if they did, Israel would stop their attacks. Comments?

BTW, one possible reason Israelis are suffering fewer casualties could be because they are using shelters.



you think that the reasons for israeli aggresion in the region is the two soldiers and the rockets being fired.
i think everybody understands that, and in fact, elene dealt with it directly in a post found here, to which you have not responded.
she also repsoned to your point about shelters.
do you feel she misunderstood your point in a way that americans would not have?
do you know if she is american?

haus mentioned your lack of engagement with many of the points , commenting that it Must be remarkable to post to Barbelith while having the entire membership on "ignore"...

do you think he misunderstood you?
do you think that means he is not american?
 
 
*
09:06 / 11.08.06
Until your plan to give California back to Mexico goes through, Dragon, I'm an American. I have been one all my life. I have no trouble communicating with most of Barbelith— which, by the way, our pleasant illusions aside, does not constitute a "culture" in the sense most people use the word to describe. Your points, on the other hand, are opaque to me.

For instance, this:

The 'weird' varieties are what I would call extremists.

You've just said, in essence:

Some members of the group "Muslim" act in ways that I don't understand, and I call them people who act in ways that I don't understand.

That clarifies things not at all. It would actually be more helpful to me if you would say the latter than the former, because you effectively cloaked what you actually said in meaningless labels that only served to confuse the issue more. I don't understand why some people blow themselves and others to pieces, either, but I think the reasons must be very complex. It doesn't help us get at or discuss those reasons when you attempt to stop the discussion at "They do 'weird' things because they're extreme"/"They do incomprehensible things because they're incomprehensible," or "I call some people 'weird' if they're extreme"/"I call some people incomprehensible if I don't understand them."
 
 
Jack The Bodiless
10:10 / 11.08.06
Mods: can we change the title of this thread to 'A socratic dialogue/intervention with an underinformed but persistent mythological reptile'? Cheersthanksbye.
 
 
illmatic
11:17 / 11.08.06
Dragon, a quote from your link:

But this complex local political history is completely lost in the simplistic reductionism of terms like Muslim fundamentalism, which ultimately explains little by blaming a multitude of problems common to less developed countries (including violence and lack of democracy) on religion.

Now I agree with that. Do you?
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
11:24 / 11.08.06
Meanwhile, back at the ranch...

Israel asks US to get a wiggle on with the bang bang machines. Time's a-wasting!
 
 
Dragon
00:16 / 12.08.06
I am not ignoring anyone. As I previously mentioned, I don't have as much time as I would like to pursue a satisfactory explanation for my viewpoints, despite a budding belief that some of you are being intentionally obtuse. If you cannot grok that there's a difference between muslims who distort Islam, and muslims who do not, you are truly beyond hope.

I'm not saying I'm there will be no attempt. For those of you who have surely inferred that I'm backing out, you are mistaken. After all, I'm your persistent mythological reptile...
 
 
Francine I
00:51 / 12.08.06
"If you cannot grok that there's a difference between muslims who distort Islam, and muslims who do not, you are truly beyond hope."

I don't think that's the issue. I think the issue is one of spin. Also, I wonder if you would capitalize "Christian" but not "Muslim". That's the impression you're giving, and that's why you're getting the reactions you are. It's a very transparent process. It might be reasonable to infer that others would view you as being "truly beyond hope" for such clumsy bigotry.

On that subject, though -- you're making a large issue of that here. You seem to think it's a particularly meaningful framework for discussing the Israel vs. Hezbollah issue. Meanwhile, Haus has posted and referred to what sounds to be a convincing case that Hezbollah actually has a primarily secular composition. I notice you haven't addressed that. I think where you'll find the most dispute is in your choice of focus: it's apparent to me, and I think many others, that terrorism has mostly secular causes and goals but tends to amplify cultural motifs surrounding it, often times in a canny attempt to manipulate and seduce people who are focusing on self-same motifs as the cure to their secular ills. For example, the United States routinely terrorizes defenseless states and does so with gusto filled talk of "Democracy" and "Freedom". If you ask many Americans why Iraq has been decimated in a quite anti-humanitarian way, they'll answer that it's a quest for the spread of democracy that's merely gone slightly awry. Would you therefore blame the ideologies of "Democracy" and "Freedom" for the behaviour of the chicken hawks who are typically at the helm of U.S. foreign policy?
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
10:30 / 12.08.06
As I previously mentioned, I don't have as much time as I would like to pursue a satisfactory explanation for my viewpoints, despite a budding belief that some of you are being intentionally obtuse.

Consider for a moment what those of us who knew where Lebanon was longer ago than July feel about you, Dragon.
 
 
grant
21:14 / 12.08.06
To be fair to Dragon, I think it was DEDI who actually suggested giving California back to Mexico.

Sleaze says: As for 'decreasing Iran's influence', are you at all aware that the biggest single factor in increasing Iran's influence in recent years has been the US. The US neutralised the threats posed to Iran by Saddam's Iraq and Taliban Afghanistan. In the case of Iraq, The US managed to further to empower Iran by increasing the influence of Iraqi Shias, many of whose clerics were apparently educated in religious institutions in Iran. Even the raised oil prices that have resulted from instability in Iraq have managed to boost the prospects of Irans own indigenous oil supplies

You skipped the number one fun fact! The problem with Reagan's support for the Contras wasn't just that he was essentially supporting a war that the Congress hadn't let the US get involved it, but that he was doing it by selling arms to... g'wan. Guess.

Which makes the recent tut-tutting by touring senators particularly galling.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
00:36 / 13.08.06
Well, quite. I mentioned this in the immigration thread. I find the idea that, once the hostages the release of which was the original justification for selling arms to Iran were released, the trade channels that were opened could not in good free market conduct be closed really interesting - if it hadn't been the Contras then maybe it could have been the vital national interest of road-building programmes. Which feeds into the awkwardness of the US positioning itself as a peacemaker in a conflict between Israel and Hizbollah, to one of which, as far as we know, it is selling weapons.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
07:28 / 13.08.06
Oh, one thing:

Haus has posted and referred to what sounds to be a convincing case that Hezbollah actually has a primarily secular composition.

I think Pape's research indicates more that suicide bombers claimed by Hizbollah are not necessarily (or usually) members of fundamentalist Islamic groups. It's tricky, of course, because Hizbollah means "God's army", but then isn't the US often referred to as "God's country" (well, the US and Wales)?

Also, although we can't underplay the financial and political importance of Iran, currently under a fairly strict theocratic rule, Hizbollah itself has some surprisingly progressive viewpoints. For example, it sees and treats women as equal citizens, entitled to vote, work, and so on, whereas one of the things that people with a limited understanding of the Middle East (hi, Dragon) often do is use the position of states on the status and role of women to decry members of a religion. However, what Dragon feels about Islamic attitudes to women, and whether it is an important factor in decided what is and is not a "twisted" form of Islam remains unclear.
 
 
illmatic
18:27 / 13.08.06
Dragon, the issue isn't who is distoting Islam and who isn't - as Frances says above, it's that these acts of war/terrorism have secular causes which are then justified, explained and strengthed through appeals to Islam, much as Western wars are justified through appeals to Christianity and/or our secular values. If you view them simply as "distortions of Islam" you are missing out a major part of the context.

Furthermore, to view them in this light takes away our complicty in these events. If it's just "Islam" (albeit distorted), then it isn't something that we can really influence, is it? If on the other hand, these struggles emerge from disputes over territory, resources etc. - well, we have a long and chequered history in these areas, and ongoing involvements, so part of the responsibility comes back to us.
 
  

Page: 1 ... 56789(10)11

 
  
Add Your Reply